feat: cross-skill TODOS awareness + Greptile template refs in all skills

/ship Step 5.5: auto-detect completed TODOs, offer reorganization.
/review Step 5.5: cross-reference PR against open TODOs.
/plan-ceo-review, /plan-eng-review: TODOS context in planning.
/retro: Backlog Health metric. /qa: bug TODO context in diff-aware mode.
All Greptile-aware skills now reference reply templates and escalation detection.
This commit is contained in:
Garry Tan
2026-03-14 22:04:44 -05:00
parent 9b82ae8973
commit cec7ee9980
12 changed files with 278 additions and 38 deletions
+2 -1
View File
@@ -51,6 +51,7 @@ Before reviewing anything, answer these questions:
1. **What existing code already partially or fully solves each sub-problem?** Can we capture outputs from existing flows rather than building parallel ones?
2. **What is the minimum set of changes that achieves the stated goal?** Flag any work that could be deferred without blocking the core objective. Be ruthless about scope creep.
3. **Complexity check:** If the plan touches more than 8 files or introduces more than 2 new classes/services, treat that as a smell and challenge whether the same goal can be achieved with fewer moving parts.
4. **TODOS cross-reference:** Read `TODOS.md` if it exists. Are any deferred items blocking this plan? Can any deferred items be bundled into this PR without expanding scope? Does this plan create new work that should be captured as a TODO?
Then ask if I want one of three options:
1. **SCOPE REDUCTION:** The plan is overbuilt. Propose a minimal version that achieves the core goal, then review that.
@@ -123,7 +124,7 @@ Every plan review MUST produce a "NOT in scope" section listing work that was co
List existing code/flows that already partially solve sub-problems in this plan, and whether the plan reuses them or unnecessarily rebuilds them.
### TODOS.md updates
After all review sections are complete, present each potential TODO as its own individual AskUserQuestion. Never batch TODOs — one per question. Never silently skip this step.
After all review sections are complete, present each potential TODO as its own individual AskUserQuestion. Never batch TODOs — one per question. Never silently skip this step. Follow the format in `.claude/skills/review/TODOS-format.md`.
For each TODO, describe:
* **What:** One-line description of the work.
+2 -1
View File
@@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ Before reviewing anything, answer these questions:
1. **What existing code already partially or fully solves each sub-problem?** Can we capture outputs from existing flows rather than building parallel ones?
2. **What is the minimum set of changes that achieves the stated goal?** Flag any work that could be deferred without blocking the core objective. Be ruthless about scope creep.
3. **Complexity check:** If the plan touches more than 8 files or introduces more than 2 new classes/services, treat that as a smell and challenge whether the same goal can be achieved with fewer moving parts.
4. **TODOS cross-reference:** Read `TODOS.md` if it exists. Are any deferred items blocking this plan? Can any deferred items be bundled into this PR without expanding scope? Does this plan create new work that should be captured as a TODO?
Then ask if I want one of three options:
1. **SCOPE REDUCTION:** The plan is overbuilt. Propose a minimal version that achieves the core goal, then review that.
@@ -114,7 +115,7 @@ Every plan review MUST produce a "NOT in scope" section listing work that was co
List existing code/flows that already partially solve sub-problems in this plan, and whether the plan reuses them or unnecessarily rebuilds them.
### TODOS.md updates
After all review sections are complete, present each potential TODO as its own individual AskUserQuestion. Never batch TODOs — one per question. Never silently skip this step.
After all review sections are complete, present each potential TODO as its own individual AskUserQuestion. Never batch TODOs — one per question. Never silently skip this step. Follow the format in `.claude/skills/review/TODOS-format.md`.
For each TODO, describe:
* **What:** One-line description of the work.